Second Amendment Sisters ... [Archive] - Glock Talk


View Full Version : Second Amendment Sisters ...

Gary F
05-10-2002, 20:39
Who has a membership with the second amendment sisters, and if not ...WHY NOT?
Great organization .... yes I have a 'associate membership'. Check out there sites & events that may be happening in your home areas (perhaps on mother's day ...)!

peace, gary

05-10-2002, 23:55
I did consider joining until I read their site. A tad too militant for me...

05-11-2002, 23:24
I'm a member in good standing. :D

BikerGoddess, even if they are a bit militant (which I don't see; maybe I'm a bit militant myself?), the antis are certainly militant when it comes to forcing their agendas down our throats. Personally, I think it's time to stop "playing nice" and DEMAND that our Rights be respected.

I guess it comes as no surprise that I also belong to the "no more compromise" GOA. :)

05-12-2002, 01:42
Kim, I didn't say they were bad or not doing a good thing, just that they were too militant for my tastes. Maybe the 'why not' question was rhetorical?


05-12-2002, 02:15
BikerGoddess, I wasn't trying to criticize your decision (or at least, I hope I wasn't). I fully respect anyone's right to have an opinion other than mine (well, except for the men I date ;f ). I know from your other posts that you are a staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment and how you choose to express that Right is your choice.

I'm sincerely sorry if I came across as criticizing your personal choice. I do have a tendancy of putting my foot in my mouth; just ask Gary F if you don't believe me. :)

Again, sorry if you thought I was being critical. I wasn't trying to be.


Gary F
05-12-2002, 18:24
SlimKim: I am confused. I don't understand. I'm not really following what you are saying. No comprende. huh? what? whatcha mean?? Who is this Gary F character? Who ever he is ... I can't picture him having a critical word to say about you!
GOA is a bit radical ... but I'm also a "member in good standing" with that fine organization as well!! ;f
The excessive "survey" of opinions/fund raiser mailings from a couple of other guns right organizations has led me to discontinue those memberships.
Another "organization" that i think is valuable, though less well promoted .... , is:
I like the young man (a Liberatarian) who keeps that site/org going ... full of energy, outspoken & has a lot of initiative. I met him at the Gun Rights Conference in Fall, 2000.
I've been to quite a number of 2aSister's events/functions (including the original Wash DC rally to counter the much, much less than a Million Misled "Moms"...), and I haven't found them excessively "militant" per se. The conservative 'republicanism' is a bit awkward for me .... some more Liberatarians & maybe even a pro-second amendment democrat or two would balance out the organization here locally in Phila chapter ... but like ... hey ... at least one of the Founders / active leaders is a Liberatarian (Juli Bednarcziak) sp? ;f If gun / self-defense rights are going to be preserved over the long term ... more women & minorities need to be enlightened & become 'Second Amendment Friends'. The 2aSista's are very important in helping that to become a reality IMNSHO! ;a
To even think I could be even remotely critical of SlimKim ;L
peace, gary

05-13-2002, 00:38
Kim: No harm, no foul. I tend to be a smartass, in case that hasnt' shown through in my other posts ;)

We do need organizations who are interested in protecting our rights. I fully believe that we need 'radicals' in order to effect societal change (imagine what would happen if we were all indifferent?) but I, personally, don't want to be one of them.

And here's why. You need something in common with people in order for you to reach common ground where you can actually begin to influence each other. The very people you want to reach will stop listening to you when they view you as totally alien to their lifestyle. And if you stop listening to them, you don't grow, either.

I feel my role should be as a mediator, of sorts. I convince you that guns are not evil in themselves, and you convince me that gun ownership is not manditory. There are roles for the dictator (believe my way or else) and the doomsdayer and I can't knock anyone for playing them. I feel I have more impact as a 'role model', someone who can show others that gun ownership and concealed carry can be accomplished with thoughtfullness and sensitivity. I want to help change the image the public holds for gun owners. I want people to be surprised when they find out I have a gun. I want them to think that maybe it's not so bad after all.

If I said I participated in the Million Mom March, what would your first reaction be? That's why I don't want to be associated with the Second Amendment Sisters.


05-17-2002, 06:58
Laura, I think that we both see things the same way (surprise! surprise!). I also believe that common ground is the starting point. It's no secret in my job that I believe in guns as "the great equaliser". I have had friends and co-workers discuss the issue with me. I never play the "my way or no way" routine with them (unlike the antis). I give them documented facts; I give them my personnal experience and; I offer them a day at the firing range.

While I can't claim to have converted anyone yet, I have given 1 or 2 people pause for thought. Some of my co-workers now understand that Oprah & Peter Jennings just may have an "agenda"! I consider this to be a victory. After all, no one who thinks for themselves can go along with modern day Liberalism. ;f

As you said, we must first find common ground. Then we can begin to educate the great unwashed masses. ;)

You asked what my first reaction would be if you had participated in the MMM march. My first reaction would have been, "a misinformed mom". My next move would have been to ask you why you felt the MMM movement was appropriate. I would have then proceeded to destroy the MMM ideology in favour of the "great equaliser" embodied in the 2nd Amendment. Naturally, this is assuming that an MMMer was willing to listen to reason and logic; not one of the antis strong points.

All-in-all, I believe that we both believe in the same thing; we just believe in going about it in different manners. That doesn't make one of us right and the other wrong. It simply makes us different.

"Allah loves infinate variety" - line from Robin Hood movie; the black man Ahzime(?) explaining to a little girl why God painted him black. :cool:

Gary, I wasn't suggesting that Gary F was being critical. I was simply using that guy (I don't know him either ;) ) as someone to back up the fact that I tend to talk/write first, then think. Hey, it's a blonde thang ;g

05-17-2002, 14:12
I have a new membership with Second Amendment Sisters. Recently, I have been conversing with our local organizer. There is a family day at the range coming up which I may attend. I'm a little uneasy about shooting with strangers. I may go anyway.

05-21-2002, 04:10
Cyn, a family day at the range sponsored by the SAS? Go for it!

While I can certainly understand your reluctance to going shooting with strangers, it can also be a most rewarding and educational experience. "Family day" implies a desire to get the whole family involved with the shooting sports. Also, if SAS is involved or sponsoring it, you can bet that it will be very female friendly (I assume you're a woman).

My advise is, get out there & show 'em what you can do. If you ain't no Mossad Ayoob (and who among us are?), then you can bet that you'll learn things from people who really care that you wouldn't find anywhere else.

How about an After-Action report? :D

05-23-2002, 13:39
I was not aware there was such an organization. I will have to read the info on the site. Thanks for the heads up!!:)

05-23-2002, 16:31
Our state chapter of Second Amendment Sisters sponsors no-cost Ladies Only Day shoots. New shooters can show up and get, at no cost, a gun of their choice (many to choose from), ammunition, safety equipment, targets and a personal coach. More then one person that I know of has heard the name, looked on the web site and decided that they were too militant, without benefit of looking at the organization from within, or through a local effort. We are steadily increasing new shooters from 20 the first year, 30 the year after, last year 40 and now, 50 new shooters a session, four sessions a year.

05-23-2002, 23:35
If gun / self-defense rights are going to be preserved over the long term ... more women & minorities need to be enlightened...

Truer words have not been spoken.

05-24-2002, 01:23
Originally posted by Kilroy
More then one person that I know of has heard the name, looked on the web site and decided that they were too militant, without benefit of looking at the organization from within, or through a local effort.

Seems the obvious solution is to update the website, then, no?

Why would someone take the effort to find out that an organization is not how it presents itself, when there are so many other organizations and interests out there? When you go into a book store, do you read every book before picking one? Or do you narrow it down based on titles and blurbs on the front cover?

Kim, exactly. You'd think I was wrong, based solely on my association with the group. I do think we're coming from the same viewpoint, mostly, though.


05-24-2002, 17:22
Hey Kilroy, looks like you stole Amelia's avater. Looks like a law suit to me.

Amelia, For a "small fee", I can find a liberal trial lawyer to sue Kilroy if you'ld like. ;e

BikerGoddess, you're not insinuating that you belong to the MMM? You'ld have to knock me over the head with a baseball bat for me to believe that!

Gary F
05-24-2002, 19:37
slimkimberly: you lose your job? what's the recent fascination with lawsuits?? lol hehehehehe NO, NO, NO, NO ... not a chance that BikerGoddess has any affiliation with MMM!! geeeeeeeezzZZZZZ
bikergoddess: SAS-AIMM web site doesn't strike me as militant at all; Where you get that impression? Assertive - yeah Empowering - sure
Militant - Naaah ....

Random House Webster's College Dictionary (1991)
Militant: 1. Vigorously active, aggressive, and often combative, esp. in support of a cause: militant reformers 2. engaged in warfare; fighting - n. 3. a militant person. 4. a person engaged in combat

i don't see the "aggressive", "often combative" ... nor the "engaged in warfare".
peace, gary

05-24-2002, 23:05
Originally posted by SlimKim
Amelia, For a "small fee", I can find a liberal trial lawyer to sue Kilroy if you'ld like. ;e

I'd rather be dead than have a liberal trial lawyer on retainer, but thanks for the offer. ;f ;f ;f

Anyhow, Kilroy is my buddy, and he has permission to use my avatars as does most of the world since I post them for that reason, like here, for example:

And of course, that one tells an important truth that far too many gun owners forget. :rolleyes: I'm thinking about making one that says "spend more on training than you spend on guns."

Now, if you find a liberal trial lawyer stealing one... that's another story altogether. \


05-25-2002, 01:57
Kim, nah, I think they're all wrong, too, based on their association with that group ;) I was just pointing out that you make judgements about members based on the philosophy of the group they belong to.

Gary, I'm sure we have different sensitivities to 'militant'. Your threshold is higher than mine, but it's my contention that mine is also greater than the people we're trying to reach. And if *I* think it's kinda militant, *they* are going to think it's really militant. I'm not putting the group down at all, merely explaining why I choose not to join.